From: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>
To: "Holmberg, Hans" <hans.holmberg@intel.com>,
Tyler Hall <tylerwhall@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com>,
"linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
Daniel Mack <zonque@gmail.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Howard Cochran <cochran@lexmark.com>
Subject: Re: gpio-pxa: getting GPIOs by devicetree phandle broken
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2015 18:38:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87mw4n6l40.fsf@free.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOjnSCZgx5H75t8QrXj1WQ_SaU_4HDYeK+_XdBRmwUXzHW=iJw@mail.gmail.com> (Tyler Hall's message of "Mon, 9 Feb 2015 09:41:17 -0500")
Tyler Hall <tylerwhall@gmail.com> writes:
>> The issue with multiple gpiochips per of-node could be worked around as followed I believe, comments?
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c
>> index 08261f2..43984ab 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c
>> @@ -47,11 +47,12 @@ static int of_gpiochip_find_and_xlate(struct gpio_chip *gc, void *data)
>> ret = gc->of_xlate(gc, &gg_data->gpiospec, gg_data->flags);
>> if (ret < 0) {
>> /* We've found the gpio chip, but the translation failed.
>> - * Return true to stop looking and return the translation
>> - * error via out_gpio
>> + * Store translation error in out_gpio.
>> + * Return false to keep looking, as more than one GPIO chip
>> + * could be registered per of-node.
>> */
>> gg_data->out_gpio = ERR_PTR(ret);
>> - return true;
>> + return false;
>> }
>>
>> gg_data->out_gpio = gpiochip_get_desc(gc, ret);
>
> As long as we're ok with multiple gpiochips per of-node, this would
> work for me. It'll change the preference of which chip returns the
> error in the case of multiple chips, but that's already undefined
> behavior.
Looks good to me too, this will solve my issue, and the global behavior would be
consistent with the former one.
Would you care submitting a proper patch so that we can apply our Reviewed-by,
Tested-by etc ... ?
Cheers.
--
Robert
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>
To: "Holmberg\, Hans" <hans.holmberg@intel.com>,
Tyler Hall <tylerwhall@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com>,
"linux-gpio\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
"devicetree\@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
Daniel Mack <zonque@gmail.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Howard Cochran <cochran@lexmark.com>
Subject: Re: gpio-pxa: getting GPIOs by devicetree phandle broken
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2015 18:38:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87mw4n6l40.fsf@free.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOjnSCZgx5H75t8QrXj1WQ_SaU_4HDYeK+_XdBRmwUXzHW=iJw@mail.gmail.com> (Tyler Hall's message of "Mon, 9 Feb 2015 09:41:17 -0500")
Tyler Hall <tylerwhall@gmail.com> writes:
>> The issue with multiple gpiochips per of-node could be worked around as followed I believe, comments?
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c
>> index 08261f2..43984ab 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c
>> @@ -47,11 +47,12 @@ static int of_gpiochip_find_and_xlate(struct gpio_chip *gc, void *data)
>> ret = gc->of_xlate(gc, &gg_data->gpiospec, gg_data->flags);
>> if (ret < 0) {
>> /* We've found the gpio chip, but the translation failed.
>> - * Return true to stop looking and return the translation
>> - * error via out_gpio
>> + * Store translation error in out_gpio.
>> + * Return false to keep looking, as more than one GPIO chip
>> + * could be registered per of-node.
>> */
>> gg_data->out_gpio = ERR_PTR(ret);
>> - return true;
>> + return false;
>> }
>>
>> gg_data->out_gpio = gpiochip_get_desc(gc, ret);
>
> As long as we're ok with multiple gpiochips per of-node, this would
> work for me. It'll change the preference of which chip returns the
> error in the case of multiple chips, but that's already undefined
> behavior.
Looks good to me too, this will solve my issue, and the global behavior would be
consistent with the former one.
Would you care submitting a proper patch so that we can apply our Reviewed-by,
Tested-by etc ... ?
Cheers.
--
Robert
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-09 17:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-06 21:28 gpio-pxa: getting GPIOs by devicetree phandle broken Tyler Hall
2015-02-09 6:11 ` Alexandre Courbot
2015-02-09 8:02 ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-02-09 8:02 ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-02-09 9:42 ` Holmberg, Hans
2015-02-09 9:42 ` Holmberg, Hans
2015-02-09 14:41 ` Tyler Hall
2015-02-09 17:38 ` Robert Jarzmik [this message]
2015-02-09 17:38 ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-02-10 5:33 ` Alexandre Courbot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87mw4n6l40.fsf@free.fr \
--to=robert.jarzmik@free.fr \
--cc=cochran@lexmark.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gnurou@gmail.com \
--cc=hans.holmberg@intel.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tylerwhall@gmail.com \
--cc=zonque@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.